Click images for more details



Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace


"For Christ’s sake! Why do liberals get tongue-tied when discussing the world’s largest religion?"

Following Sri Lanka’s Easter tragedy, high-ranking Democrats engaged in a game of semantics gymnastics, dancing around the name of ‘Christians’. Republicans took it as proof of democratic enmity to Christianity.
In the aftermath of Sunday’s carnage, which left over 350 people dead and many more injured, a group of Democratic leaders, including Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, took to Twitter to offer their condolences to friends and families of the Sri Lanka victims. If we were living in less complicated times that would have been the end of the story.

But of course these are not less complicated times. Thus, the memory of the Easter Sunday bombing victims was overshadowed by Obama and Clinton, as well as other Democratic politicians’ use of the term “Easter worshippers” as opposed to the seemingly more appropriate “Christians.”

“The attacks on tourists and Easter worshippers in Sri Lanka are an attack on humanity,” commented the former US president.

A few hours later, Hillary Clinton tweeted out her own sympathy message, also using the strained, awkward-sounding “Easter worshippers” nomenclature. “I'm praying for everyone affected by today's horrific attacks on Easter worshippers and travelers in Sri Lanka,” she commented.

Do the PC thought police have a valid objection this time?

...The condemnation went much further than simply a matter of semantics. Conservatives, Christians and nitpicking pedants were quick to point out that in the aftermath of last month’s Christchurch mosque shooting, which left 50 dead, Obama and Clinton both specifically mentioned ‘Muslim community’ in their tweets of consolation.

Aside from the question as to whether or not these two high-ranking Democrats consult each other before tweeting is the more pressing one: Why wasn’t the same name recognition extended to the ‘Christian community’ following the Sri Lanka tragedy, which resulted in over 300 deaths – or six times more fatalities than in Christchurch?

...Meanwhile, there is a high hypocrisy factor that comes from watching Obama and Clinton publicly express remorse over the death of Muslims when it was the Obama administration, continuing with the trendy war dance put in motion by the George W. Bush administration, that was responsible for untold death and destruction across a large swath of the Middle East and North Africa.

In the final year of his two-term reign of terror, according to Micah Zenko, a fellow at the Center for Preventive Action, Barack Obama and his Secretary of State Hillary Clinton dropped at least 26,171 bombs on seven Muslim countries, including Syria, Iraq, Libya and Pakistan.

To put the carnage another way, that’s three bombs every hour, 24 hours a day.

Here’s another Obama fun fact: no other US leader has overseen more military action on his watch than the 44th president. And again, the overwhelming majority of that action has been in Muslim countries.

“While candidate Obama came to office pledging to end George W Bush’s wars, he leaves office having been at war longer than any president in US history,” wrote Medea Benjamin, co-founder of Code Pink. “He is also the only president to serve two complete terms with the nation at war."

With those sorts of disturbing statistics in mind, it kind of makes sense in a warped sort of way why Obama and Clinton would be so enthusiastic about reaching out to the ‘Muslim community’ in their time of need. While Christian churches are being attacked at an unprecedented rate, it was the Democrats who happily took over from George W. Bush the task of bombing Muslim countries back to the Stone Age. In other words, is their outpouring of grief for the Muslim community more a symptom of guilt that these two Democrats may or may not feel over their egregious behavior in the past? Or are we simply dealing with a liberal knee-jerk aversion to any majority group, whether it be ‘privileged’ Whites, Christians or the Republican Party?"

Apr 26, 2019 at 8:42 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson
Apr 26, 2019 at 8:41 AM | Unregistered CommenterDouglas

How the BBC double dips(again) and keeps plugging XR:

"Extinction Rebellion Protests: What happened?
25 April 2019"

Apr 26, 2019 at 8:38 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

Can I gather from all the flouncing and threats about the leak of the Huawei deal and the lack of any concerns over previous, numerous leaks mean that the previous leaks were sanctioned? I've know for a long time that government leak policy plans early to guage public reaction but perhaps there hasn't been a genuine leak for years.

Apr 26, 2019 at 8:37 AM | Unregistered CommenterTinyCO2

"Climate change: Is Greta Thunberg right about UK carbon emissions?
By Rachel Schraer
BBC Reality Check"

It's interesting how the ground rules are now changing, and the alarmists are starting to adopt some of our arguments! See also the threads involving discussion with Phil Clarke, here:

and here (at the end of the thread):

Apr 26, 2019 at 8:36 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

"Macron’s response to Yellow Jackets
French president suggests an EU carbon tax and reducing the number of countries in Schengen."

""I want the French to know, I felt it in my flesh what they were saying and expressing ... This period has changed me," Macron told more than 200 journalists in what was his first press conference for reporters in France since becoming president in 2017.

He spoke for more than two hours, seated behind a desk in the Élysée Palace's ornate Hall of Festivities, eschewing his usual combative tone toward journalists and appearing at times contemplative, striking poses and looking up while pondering responses during the Q&A session that followed his speech.

Despite his conciliatory tone, he rejected some of the major demands of protesters, including reinstating a tax on the wealthy, and making the democratic process more representative by holding citizen-led referendums.

...A month before the European Parliament election, Europe played a prominent role in his address. Macron seemed to punt the responsibility for tackling climate change over to the EU, proposing an EU carbon tax, a carbon price floor and “more ambitious green finance” policy at the EU level.

“The climate has to be at the heart of the national and the European project,” he said.

The Yellow Jackets protest movement, which has often led to violence, was largely spurred by the introduction of a national carbon tax, which Macron revoked a month into the protests.

He also expanded on his previous suggestion of “overhauling” Schengen, suggesting that countries that either refuse to take in refugees or that don’t enforce border controls shouldn’t be part of the border-free zone.

“On the European level, we decided to have common borders … it not working anymore,” he said. “Responsibility comes with solidarity. This is the basis upon which Schengen should be overhauled, even if it means having fewer states within Schengen.”

Macron also pushed back on the notion that he had failed to get much support for his plans to overhaul the EU, because of disagreements with Germany.

...Macron's press conference was also an opportunity for him to renew his European Parliament election push, especially by attempting to appeal to right-wing voters. Twice, he made statements on migration and Islam that had striking similarities with hard-line right-wing positions.

"In order to take in people, one has to have a home, which means borders,” he said, echoing similar statements by two right-wing MEP candidates recently.

Macron also said: “When we speak about secularism … we speak of people who in the name of a religion pursue a political project, that of a political Islam that wants to secede from our republic.”"

So, with Euro-elections pending, Macron now tries to woo the French right?

Apr 26, 2019 at 8:33 AM | Unregistered CommenterMark Hodgson

So we're 80% ready for WTO trade7 What exactly does that mean. As I understand it WTO trading means that without a trade deal (UK has 4 last time I looked) a country has to apply the same rariffs on the same goods imported from from any WTO member. Other WTO nations are not obliged to apply the same tariffs as the UK on trade in the opposite direction. Therefore the UK as an advocate of free trade could have zero tariffs on all goods imported and suffer from high tariffs on all exports. Non tariff barriers are not allowed. This is why nations create trade deals and enter free trade areas like AFTA, APTA and AANZFTA.
In these circumstances 80% ready seems a bit on the high side as in a no deal environment trade with the EU would have to be on a nation by nation basis and the UK, not surprisingly does most trade with EU nations. equally the rest of the world and EU nations have to be ready to trade with the UK on WTO rules.
So what am I missing?

Apr 26, 2019 at 7:32 AM | Unregistered CommenterIn The Dark

@Apr 25, 2019 at 10:46 PM | Unregistered CommenterDouglas
Well Tennis (WTA) might do for the UK given the two-ing and fro-ing of May's and parliament's approach to things re Brexit ...but it should have been WTO

Apr 26, 2019 at 12:34 AM | Unregistered CommenterDouglas

Apr 25, 2019 at 10:21 PM | M Courtney

Thank you for that! It is one of those political hit-piece articles that may come back to haunt everyone apart from the target.

Apr 26, 2019 at 12:30 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

"In 2011 alone, the EU imported beef and livestock feed associated with Brazilian deforestation equivalent to more than 300 football fields per day, say the scientists."

Apr 25, 2019 at 9:10 PM | Mark Hodgson"

Try searching Carbon Credits Brazillian Rainforest

You never know, but some people could have benefitted from not cutting down the trees, whilst others got paid for cutting down the same trees, and growing cattle on sustainable vegetation known as grass.

Apr 26, 2019 at 12:05 AM | Unregistered Commentergolf charlie

PostCreate a New Post

Enter your information below to create a new post.
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>